Nurture Or Nature? A Question Of Breeding

[MelodysMum]

An interesting story (with video) in the Herald -

http://www.smh.com.au/victoria/nurture-or-nature-a-question-of-breeding-20120113-1pzhn.html

Nurture or nature? A question of breeding

BULL terrier breeder Norm Jessup dotes on his dogs like children. They sit on chairs beside him and nuzzle into his shoulders seeking affection while he sips a cup of tea.

These dogs once held a fearsome reputation with their sloped ''Roman noses'', sunken eyes and powerful jaws - attributes bred over generations for fighting bulls. He embraces his animals with a father's warmth.

Research has proven that in these tender moments dog owners produce a hormone called oxytocin - the same hormone which helps parents bond with their children. But experts, such as animal behaviorist Dr Linda Marston, believe this bond can blind owners to their dog's dangerous potential.

''It's like that rosy glasses effect,'' she says. ''People see their own dogs, generally speaking, in a much more positive light than other people might see them because they love them.''

Researchers at Azabu University in Japan found that a dog's gaze is enough to increase their owner's oxytocin level.

And that feeling is probably mutual. Dr Marston says dogs experience similar feelings in the close company of their owners. ''When your oxytocin levels go up so do the dog's.''

Jessup keeps his six dogs in a secure network of cages at his Pearcedale home on Melbourne's outskirts. He watches closely when he lets them out.

Jessup says the bull terrier breed has suffered from bad publicity and insists they are friendly and gentle. ''They are a strong-looking dog and I can imagine people being a bit scared. But their nature isn't that way unless they're in the wrong hands,'' he says.

Animal behaviour experts believe irresponsible owners of dogs with a violent heritage may be incapable of judging when their animal is a threat due to their close relationship.

The mauling death of four-year-old Ayen Chol by a stray pit bull terrier last year prompted calls to ban the breed.

State Agriculture Minister Peter Walsh said the dogs had ''lost their licence to exist''.

The state government introduced tough new legislation requiring pit bull owners to register their dogs. Councils can now seize and destroy restricted breed dogs including pit bulls.

Dr Marston opposes banning particular dog breeds but believes owners must understand the purpose for which their dog, including the bull terrier, was originally bred.

''They had to go in and hang on to a bull's nose even though it had a rampaging huge animal attached to the end of it until they brought the bull down by effectively suffocating it.''

Aram Vartanian owns three American Staffordshire Terriers, which are closely related to pit bulls. He is drawn to their muscular physique and ''beautiful '' nature. Vartanian rolls playfully in the grass with his dog Atilla while his two nieces watch.

He admits the dogs evoke fear in others. ''Sometimes I see people move away. I've even overheard a parent say 'don't go near those dogs they're dangerous','' he says. ''I just think they're misinterpreted.''

Vartanian says a balanced upbringing will produce a family friendly pet even though its ancestors were bred for fighting. He supports tighter scrutiny of owners because ''hype'' surrounding American Staffordshire Terriers attracts the ''wrong kinds of owners''. Police say intimidating dogs are used to project an aura of violence and intimidation. Brimbank Superintendent Graham Kent says some criminals treat aggressive dogs as status symbols and use them to terrorise people in crimes such as enforcing drug debts.

He has supervised investigations of dog attacks and instances in which vicious dogs were used as weapons. ''We sometimes see people walking around the suburbs with these dogs. They'll have their dog on display and they'll have their tattoos on display. It's a bit about a show of force and intimidation,'' he says. ''You can't help but think it might be a status symbol.''

Dr Marston agrees. ''There are certain parts of the community that may specifically want that behaviour,'' she says. Intimidating dogs are often associated with ''street cred''. Dr Marston says culture and fashion dictates which breeds are regarded as dangerous and this perception changes over time. German shepherds were once banned in Australia and Dobermans, Rottweilers and bull terriers have also had ''image problems''. In the US, pit bulls are considered the ''American national dog'' while bull terriers are now common pets in the UK.

Jessup fears ''incorrect publicity'' about bull terriers will result in them joining Victoria's dangerous dogs list alongside pit bulls. ''The bull terrier over the years has carried the tarnished name that it's an aggressive dog but it's not,'' he says.

Jessup and Vartanian insist their bull terrier breeds make great pets. But Jessup says owners and breeders should have to meet rigorous standards of education and safety. ''In the wrong hands any dog can be an issue,'' he says.

[asal]

my aunt used to breed bull terriorists, LOL.

yep scary dogs all right, help the burgler carry out the furniture that lot.

[Teebs]

my aunt used to breed bull terriorists, LOL.

yep scary dogs all right, help the burgler carry out the furniture that lot.

Help? dont be silly!

More like lay on their backs in the way and trip them over... the best watch dogs!

[german_shep_fan]

I was saying yesterday how uniformed and worrying the public comments on that article are! If some of those idiots had their way nothing over 5cm tall would be legal!

[MelodysMum]

Yes, they are extremely worrying comments aren't they?

[Podengo]

Do the people that comment on these sorts of articles really think that if pitbulls suddenly vanished into thin air, there would be no more dog bites?!

[Sandra777]

Why does the article start talking about Bull Terriers then go on to talk about APBT's?

Why does it not mention at least in passing that these two breeds are about as closely related as say Rottweilers and GSPs?

The Bull Terrier was NEVER bred as a bull baiting dog - that's the Bulldog.

The Bull Terrier is probably the ONLY breed ever deliberately bred for the show ring - it was created with crosses from the old fighting dogs and breeds such as the Pointer & Dalmatian to make a "gentleman's dog" which was white and which looked the part but which was specifically intended to be paraded up the street with it's image-conscience owner and go to dog shows when they came along.

Yes, there are the odd report of the occasional Bull Terrier being pitted against an old fighting dog but in the main these would have been more to reassure the "dandy" owners that they were getting something which could do the job, when reality it's unlikely the ones that were any good for fighting went anywhere ;)

[Sue]

Lol, Sandra, you don't even have Bull Terrier's but you know the real history of the breed. Pity the same old "fighting" tripe keeps getting bandied around by the press and uneducated people.

Edited January 15, 2012 by Sue

[MelodysMum]

Do the people that comment on these sorts of articles really think that if pitbulls suddenly vanished into thin air, there would be no more dog bites?!

Yes, I think some of them do actually believe that!

Edited January 15, 2012 by WendyH

[german_shep_fan]

Do the people that comment on these sorts of articles really think that if pitbulls suddenly vanished into thin air, there would be no more dog bites?!

Yep they do, they are uneducated morons. Even worse, they think if they get rid of all bull breeds then all the big "aggressive" breeds all their doggie problems will be solved :rolleyes:

[Jumabaar]

Is that me or is that a very crappy article. It seemed to cover a number of topics, all of them badly, and then not come to a point??

I assume that the author is Pro BSL, but wanted to write an unbiased article??? If thats the case they failed

So point one

Looking at dogs gives owner an oxytocin release

point two

bull terriers are dangerous but owners can't see that they are vicious because of the oxytocin? (Although the writer did manage to see these dogs without incident and said that the owner was responsible and the dogs were not aggressive)

point three

pit bulls are bad and council is wiping them out

point four

you can't change instinct or behaviour with breeding over time (where are these experts when we have a working kelpie Vs show kelpie debate!!!)

point five

bull terriers (I assume research ended after they wrote down the breed name) attack bulls

point six

Staffords look like pit bulls but one man likes his one, but other people are scared because it looks scary. but if you bring them up well that they can be nice dogs (I assume a good writer at this point would link back to point one and four but they didn't)

point seven

bad people want to buy breeds that look tough and then actively make the dog reactive/dangerous

point seven

only responsible people should own these dogs........ Um no shit sherlock!!

So what was the point. Is the article saying that people should have them and people that say that they are good dogs are only riding a hormone high? Or that they can be good dogs? And what breed was this actually about?

Sigh

[Maddy]

''They had to go in and hang on to a bull's nose even though it had a rampaging huge animal attached to the end of it until they brought the bull down by effectively suffocating it.''

Because it's a well-known fact that cows can't breathe through their mouths.

The point of baiting wasn't to kill the bull by suffocation, the pinning of the nose was to bring the bull down, where it is less capable of defending itself by kicking or crushing the dogs.

And as someone already pointed out, that was bulldogs anyway. You'd think they'd check statements made by "experts" and edit them from the story if the "expert" turned out to be a mouth-breathing moron.

Kind of makes me wonder why you never hear bulldogs being accused of attacks..

[asal]

''They had to go in and hang on to a bull's nose even though it had a rampaging huge animal attached to the end of it until they brought the bull down by effectively suffocating it.''

Because it's a well-known fact that cows can't breathe through their mouths.

The point of baiting wasn't to kill the bull by suffocation, the pinning of the nose was to bring the bull down, where it is less capable of defending itself by kicking or crushing the dogs.

And as someone already pointed out, that was bulldogs anyway. You'd think they'd check statements made by "experts" and edit them from the story if the "expert" turned out to be a mouth-breathing moron.

Kind of makes me wonder why you never hear bulldogs being accused of attacks..

:rofl: O my ... well for starters maybe its because their legs are too short to reach past anyones ankles unless they fell first. then because if they are going to it will be a lick em to death experience????????

[Maddy]

''They had to go in and hang on to a bull's nose even though it had a rampaging huge animal attached to the end of it until they brought the bull down by effectively suffocating it.''

Because it's a well-known fact that cows can't breathe through their mouths.

The point of baiting wasn't to kill the bull by suffocation, the pinning of the nose was to bring the bull down, where it is less capable of defending itself by kicking or crushing the dogs.

And as someone already pointed out, that was bulldogs anyway. You'd think they'd check statements made by "experts" and edit them from the story if the "expert" turned out to be a mouth-breathing moron.

Kind of makes me wonder why you never hear bulldogs being accused of attacks..

:rofl: O my ... well for starters maybe its because their legs are too short to reach past anyones ankles unless they fell first. then because if they are going to it will be a lick em to death experience????????

The name has "bull" in it though and that seems to be the word that gets everyone worried. Pit bull, bull terrier, bull mastiff, staffordshire bull terrier.. bulldog

[Teebs]

:rofl: O my ... well for starters maybe its because their legs are too short to reach past anyones ankles unless they fell first. then because if they are going to it will be a lick em to death experience????????

I met a bulldog once at a kennel i ran. Horrible dog. Nasty as would would try to rip into anyone he could. The second you turned your back on him he would try to grab your leg to bite. Only management were allowed to handle him because of how dangerous he was. He was told not to come back.

This IS the issue, it isnt the breed at all, it is the deed. Just because you think a dog looks cute does not mean it is.

[Maddy]

:rofl: O my ... well for starters maybe its because their legs are too short to reach past anyones ankles unless they fell first. then because if they are going to it will be a lick em to death experience????????

I met a bulldog once at a kennel i ran. Horrible dog. Nasty as would would try to rip into anyone he could. The second you turned your back on him he would try to grab your leg to bite. Only management were allowed to handle him because of how dangerous he was. He was told not to come back.

This IS the issue, it isnt the breed at all, it is the deed. Just because you think a dog looks cute does not mean it is.

It's sort of like how people think greyhounds are elegant, graceful dogs because they're tall and skinny. Most of the accidents we've had here are because greyhounds are neither elegant or graceful. They just have extra leg length for more impressive tripping over :p

We've made our backyard idiot-proof but our greyhounds still manage to trip over, walk into things (sighthounds? Pfft :rolleyes: ) and hurt themselves on objects that seem impossible to injure yourself on. I'd love to own one of those mythical "graceful" greyhounds.

[Souff]

Another dumb article.

However, if I had a dollar for every time a dog owner stated that their dog would not harm anyone, I would be very, very rich.

The dog is an animal with teeth, and most dogs will use those teeth if they feel the need to. Whether or not that need is deemed to be appropriate in today's society is quite another matter.

The point made about dog owners not being the best person to give an opinion of their dog's capabilities is valid.

Most responsible dog owners, who know and understand the history of their dog's breed, do a pretty good job of having a balanced view and do take the necessary steps to protect the dog from itself, but there are far too many other owners who swear their dog would never harm a fly. Those owners are usually not interested in educating themselves about the dog's instincts but still see it as their right to own a dog.

Souff

[Sheridan]

I think the writer is confused between bull terriers, pitbulls and anything else with 'bull' in it.

[SpotTheDog]

I don't like the article.

I think the writer was trying to tackle the whole subject of people believing their dog would do no wrong by giving a scientific explanation for it through the release of oxytocin clouding their judgement.

Badly.

Edited January 16, 2012 by SpotTheDog

[persephone]

The dog is an animal with teeth, and most dogs will use those teeth if they feel the need to. Whether or not that need is deemed to be appropriate in today's society is quite another matter.

<br style="color: rgb(34, 34, 34); font-family: verdana, tahoma, arial, sans-serif; line-height: 18px; background-color: rgb(238, 242, 247); ">

This should be a poster !!!!